DAUPHIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WORKSHOP MEETING
WEDNDESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2006 10:00 A.M.

MEMBERS PRESENT

Jeff Haste, Chairman
Dominic D. DiFrancesco, II, Vice Chairman
George P. Hartwick, III, Secretary

STAFF PRESENT

Chad Saylor, Chief Clerk/Chief of Staff; Bruce Foreman, Esq., Assistant Solicitor; Marie Rebuck, Controller; Bob Dick, Treasurer; Guy Beneventano, Esq., Assistant Solicitor; Randy Baratucci, Purchasing Director; Tom Guenther, Information Techonology Director; Carolyn Thompson, Court Administrator; Sharon Way, Personnel; Faye Fisher, Personnel Director; Kay Sinner, Personnel; Elke Moyer, Human Services; Melanie McCaffrey, Solicitor's Office; Diane McNaughton, Press Secretary; Kim Robinson, Director of Domestic Relations; Scott Burford, Spring Creek Administrator; Julia E. Nace, Assistant Chief Clerk; and Mike Yohe, Budget Director

GUESTS PRESENT

Dan Malpezzi, and Erik Morrison of McNees, Wallace & Nurick, LLC; David McCaranh; Danett Blank; Roy Lister; Cathy Long; and Wanda Peterson

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Haste, Chairman of the Board, called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.

MOMENT OF SILENCE

Everyone observed a moment of silence.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Everyone stood for the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Mr. Haste: We don't have any minutes for approval for next week.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Mr. Haste: At this time, I would like to ask Danett Blank to come forward and talk a little bit about the project you were working on this morning. I know you have helped our Election Board and I think you have some other folks that you would like to introduce.

Ms. Blank: I appreciate the opportunity to have some people who have some visual impairments to look at the voting machines. I did not so I will not speak on that. I will introduce the individuals that had the opportunity to do that. The first one would be Roy Lister.

Mr. Lister: I do appreciate this and it is an excellent advance to us who can't read or can't see. To do the voting, fortunately my wife was able to help. The one thing that I want to point out and let others say other things, is particularly the way you can read the propositions. Some day we are going to get to the point where they are not so convoluted, you can understand them the first time you read through them. That is a great advancement and to not have her read them through and through again until I finally perhaps understand it. I think the machine is very easy to use. We suggested a few little changes which could be made but overall it is a great advancement. It will be of great help. That is all I have to say. I'm very much pleased with it.

Ms. Cathy Long: I also want to thank whoever is responsible for this advancement for the voting machine. I'm totally blind and I'm also dependent upon sighted people to read me the ballot, etc. This has given us some independence back after maybe for some who had sight and lost it. Basically, I think it is very good. I'm not computer literate. I think the directions are.. there are a lot of them and it will take a little bit of time to comprehend the procedure of doing it. I think once you sit and go over it a little bit you get the memorization part on the procedure on doing it. My one suggestion was on the keypad where the actual buttons would be more raised than indented. That would be easier to feel. I'm not a severely diabetic but that would also be a useful thing for someone that does have more neuropathy. All in all, I feel this is a good step in the right direction. Thank you very much.

Ms. Blank: The next person would be Wanda Peterson. I do want to explain. People who are diabetic, some of them will lose feeling in their fingertips.

Ms. Peterson: I'll comment from another angle. If you have someone to read the ballot, you kind of are always wondering..I've always had people read to me and they have always been very helpful. My husband was always helpful and glad to do that. But you always wonder, what are they thinking? Are they thinking that I'm voting for the wrong person in their mind? It is the idea of having a secret ballot just like everybody else has. Anybody can find someone to read the ballot; a poll worker would do it. But it is the idea of having a secret ballot just like everyone else has a secret ballot. When you go to the polls, no one knows who you are voting for. Nobody knows who you guys voted for in the last Presidential election.

Mr. Hartwick: They have a pretty good idea.

Ms. Peterson: You can make a guess but nobody actually could see your ballot. My ballot there is at least one person in the world who knows who I voted for, not who I said I was going to vote for. This election nobody has to know who I voted for. To me, that's just important as having to be accessible, as having a secret.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I would like to take a moment to thank all of you for assisting us in this practice, coming out, spending your time to give the machine a test run and see if it is the right one for Dauphin County. Thank you all very, very much.

Mr. Haste: We are at the point in the Meeting for public participation. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Board? (There was none.)

DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS/GUESTS

Mr. Haste: Chuck will you come forward?

1. Charles Mazzitti, Chief Financial Officer of Mazzitti & Sullivan EAP Services
   1. Update on services.

Mr. Mazzitti: I come before you to report on the first year of operation of the Employee Assistance Program for Dauphin County since we assumed responsibility for its administration a year ago. I don't know if you have a copy of the report.

Mr. Haste: I don't have it here but I did.

Mr. Mazzitti: I have copies for you. One of the things I want to report on, when we assumed the administration of this benefit for the employees and employees' families of Dauphin County, the utilization of services was less than 2%. At the end of the first year of operation without doing any training, without doing any employee orientation, utilization of services by employees and family members was in excess of 10%. When you add in utilization of website services by the employees and family members of Dauphin County, utilization was in excess of 18%. This puts this program near the top in terms of activity, utilization and problem solving ability to any of the contracts that we administer throughout the country. We are extremely proud to report that it has worked that well. We seem to have no problem becoming trusted by the employees and family members as a service they would call in confidence to help deal with their personal issues that affect them at home and of course at work. It has been, as far as I can see, very successful.

For the coming year, we want to enhance that contract. We've talked to some of the folks in the Human Resource Department and they indicated that they would like to see the availability of training programs for staff and supervisors. We would like to include those in the next year's contract. We have come up with a recommendation that we would provide up to six brown bag sessions, one every other month for employees of Dauphin County. In addition, we would include five full days of training on any topic selected by the Human Resources to be presented at any of the facilities in the next year's contract.

Mr. Hartwick: Chuck, you and I have obviously had an opportunity to review the proposal and the results and one of the things when we set out to take a look at our EAP services, we had obviously parallel goals in trying to make sure that we offered opportunities for our workforce to have a confidential, secure and professional service that they were able to seek out in order to remain an active employee, increase attendance in order for them to be able to receive the help that they need and obviously return back to work and obviously be much more productive in the environment. Based upon the utilization, you certainly have done your job without a significant amount of outreach. I also want to note that the actual EAP services you normally provide related to cost were a whole lot more than...you took a bath in Dauphin County.

Mr. Mazitti: We took a bath last year.

Mr. Hartwick: You offered that to Dauphin County last year because you matched the current offer that we had received for $25,000, you did it all this year for $25,000 not to mention showing up for our Crisis Response Group and being active in many of the things that we asked you to be active in, in Dauphin County. That along with additional training, along with additional outreach from you and seeing the numbers from the employees, I thought the increase that you suggested in this contract is certainly modest and one that I would support.

Mr. Haste: Thank you.

Mr. Mazitti: Thank you for your support. It has certainly been an integral part of making it work. Without your support and that of the Human Resource Department, it wouldn't be what it is.

1. Dan Melpezzi of McNees, Wallace & Nurick
   1. Adopt Resolution No. 6-2006 - EMA Resolution

Mr. Melpezzi: I'm Dan Malpezzi with the firm of McNees, Wallace & Nurick. We are bond counsel for the bond issue for the upgraded Emergency Management Response System Bond Issue that I know is in the process of being worked and structured with your financial advisers and with Mike Yohe.

This morning we have to present to you a preliminary what is called an Inducement Resolution. This is a resolution that is necessary for tax purposes to enable the County to start expending money on the program and to be able to reimburse itself for those preliminary expenditures out of the Bond Issue when in fact it is issued. This is not a formal authorization to proceed with the Bond Issue. I don't believe we are at that point yet. That is still in the process. As I understand it, there are some expenditures that are required now under contracts that are in place. This resolution would allow the County to make those expenditures and then in fact recoup those monies from the Bond Issue when it's issued.

Mr. Haste: The way Lou explained this to me is, it is just that. It is really so we can recapture expenses that we have. This does not set the Bond Issue or the repayment or the payment schedule into place at all.

Mr. Melpezzi: That is absolutely correct. This does not authorize the Bond Issue. It doesn't do anything except allow you, for tax purposes, to be reimbursed from the Bond proceeds if and when that occurs.

Mr. Haste: For, expenditures that we have to make between now and then.

Mr. Melpezzi: Yes, that is correct.

Mr. Hartwick: Should we take action on this next week or do we need to today?

Mr. Haste: They would like to do it now.

Mr. Melpezzi: I think there are payments due immediately.

Mr. Haste: Is that correct Mike? (A yes from Mike Yohe).

Is there a motion?

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to adopt Resolution No. 6-2006 allowing Dauphin County to make expenditures for expenses to upgrade and expand the Emergency Management Response System and then recoup those expenses when the Bond Issue is issued; motion carried.

PERSONNEL

Ms. Sinner: The first items I have are the Salary Board requests. There are two for Spring Creek. They are creating a medical supply control coordinator. This is the position that we've been going back and forth with. This is now a non-union position to handle the nursing supplies. They are also eliminating one full-time custodian and creating two part-time custodian positions. Parks and Recreation is changing the title of Noel Falk's position to executive administrator. Any question on those?

Mr. Hartwick: Why the title change? What was the purpose for that?

Ms. Sinner: I think they have been going under the assumption that was his title for sometime now. When I sent the position listing; that is when they raised the issue about the title. They had him listed as executive administrator and we had him listed as County Project Assistant because that is what it was created as. That's all the more explanation that I have.

Mr. Haste: Any questions?

Ms. Sinner: In the transaction listing, Spring Creek is requesting to fill a part-time custodian vacancy. The District Attorney's Office is requesting to fill a teamster's clerk III vacancy in the ARD program. Spring Creek has a new hire LPN. Domestic Relations is hiring a client service representative. They were hoping to get this in the packet last week during the window but we were not able to. They were not able to get her interviewed in time. MH/MR is hiring a caseworker. In the personnel changes, you will see a promotion of Daniel Eisenhauer into the director of MH/MR position replacing Barry Wyrick.

Mr. Hartwick: Is there any way that maybe we could receive a vote on that today? Would that be a problem? (The consensus was okay).

Ms. Sinner: There is also a transfer of a clerk from Recorder of Deeds to the Prison. Are there any questions on anything?

Mr. Hartwick: Number 6, could you explain that to me?

Ms. Sinner: I will let Scott explain that to you.

Mr. Burford: Back in January 1 when I assumed the administrator position of Spring Creek, I felt a need to reorganize the management team. Part of that reorganization includes expanding the roles of some key individuals. Number 6 is one of those key individuals. I had planned to present to you today, three other individuals whose roles have expanded. I reorganized Spring Creek, into certain categories of departments. The Business Office for instance, the person that formally oversaw the Business Office I've added additional departments to report to her. She will be presented at the next workshop meeting. This #6 has assumed some other duties along that same line, not in the Business Office but in the Human Resources area. We have seen a lot of successes in the past six weeks, successes in lost time injuries. We've seen successes with the Department of Health. I think this is only going to go forward. If we are going to make Spring Creek a stronger facility, these are the types of things that we need to do. We need to look beyond the box. Historically, the nursing home industry, we continue to do the same things over and over again and expect different outcomes. What I've tried to do when we reorganized Spring Creek is to expand the knowledge base, expect a higher level of standard and that is part of this whole package, this reorganization. I hope this is answering your question. But this is one of what will be three more.

Mr. Hartwick: I certainly agree with you and believe that is the right direction. Why do we pay additional duty instead of reclassification? If he is going to expand the duties, are you going to pay this additional duty out-of-class pay or are you going to include those new duties as part of his job description and redo a reclassification?

Mr. Burford: This is an opportunity to expand the duties and then look down the road to change and reclassify the position. At this point in time Spring Creek is on basically two tracks. I only know what I know and that is to manage the facility as a County Nursing Home. The Board has made it clear that they are entertaining other options; other options that I just can't anticipate so I need to protect, if you will my interest, which is Spring Creek as a County Nursing facility and I'm trying to do that within the framework that the Board has given me. I guess right now I'm trying to buy some time to get a better handle on what direction that the owner of Spring Creek will be in the next year.

Mr. Hartwick: Assuming there would be a new owner.

Mr. Burford: Assuming there will be a new owner.

Mr. Hartwick: But you are going under the assumption that we are going to run this...

Mr. Burford: Absolutely and right now what this is doing is temporarily buying me some time to reevaluate where Spring Creek will be and what the needs of Spring Creek is and are. Eventually, ninety days down the road, I may come back to the Board and say, we need to reclassify this position because it is clear to me that the person in this role needs to have a broader reporting structure.

Mr. Hartwick: I'm okay with that and I just wanted to know how will we receive the nature of these requests in the future and if we could expect to see these more, how we plan on going through the process of reclassification and if we are seeing results from the new direction that you set.

Mr. Burford: I want to apologize because ideally, I would have presented all four of these to you this morning but I just found that we didn't get all of our paperwork in and that will be presented to you in the next meeting.

Mr. Hartwick: Okay, thank you.

Mr. DiFrancesco: One thing that I really would like to state again for the record, the fact that this Board has not made a decision on the future of Spring Creek and the fact that when we say that we are considering all options. I think it is important for the public to understand, one of those options is that it will continue as a county nursing home. I think with all the media attention that it has received lately that sometimes people forget that. It is an option that is still very much alive and well. Again, I just want to restate that for the record. Things have been moving in the right direction. Scott, I want to commend you for the job that you have been doing. Even in the short period of time since you've taken over, I sense a new attitude and probably more optimistic then I have been for sometime that maybe there are some things that we can turn around. Thank you for the work that you do.

Mr. Burford: Thank you very much. Again we expect a higher standard from the staff in general and we cannot continue to do the same things over and over again as we have done in the past and expect a different outcome. So, I will be coming to the Board in time to explain to you in the form of a monthly report what the goals are, where we are in meeting those goals and what I think we need to do to move the building forward because I think every day we are getting stronger and stronger. Often times I'm asked, where does Spring Creek fall in the quality of care? And I've got say, this isn't a basic standard, I'm a pretty simple person. I like to think that we are better off today than we were yesterday. This is the way I approach it. This whole reorganization plan that I've mapped out is to reach that objective to make sure that tomorrow we're better than we are today. That's what this is all about.

Mr. Hartwick: I would like to add some things to Commissioner DiFrancesco's comments. Your leadership at a time where there is so much uncertainty, the issues you have with turnover, nurses and people committing in the health care field in general to jobs where there is a shortfall, you being able to manage that and maintain the quality of care you have in the face of what has been happening with surrounding circumstances, I also want to commend you on.

Mr. Burford: Thank you.

Mr. Haste: Kay, in the past week I received phone calls from the Prothonotary and the Sheriff. I had the impression they had some pressing needs and I thought that I would see something from them in the packet. I don't see anything from either one.

Ms. Sinner: Steve Farina was going to be trying to interview someone this week.

Mr. Haste: Don't we need paperwork?

Ms. Sinner: Right, I don't know how that went. I haven't heard from him.

Mr. Hartwick: We already approved the vacancy listing?

Ms. Sinner: Yes, we approved his vacancy. Perhaps the candidate couldn't come in or maybe he just decided not to offer the job to that person. The Sheriff, I don't know anything about that. I haven't been in communication with the Sheriff about any positions.

Mr. Haste: They both seemed to be under the gun and needed to move quickly. That is why I was a little surprised that I didn't see anything.

Ms. Sinner: I was at the prison yesterday but I didn't have any messages from either of them.

Mr. Hartwick: Do you want to reach out to them today?

Ms. Sinner: Sure.

Mr. Saylor: Under the new hires, the full-time caseworker for MH/MR Crisis is not one that...what I know of has a ready explanation as to why it is coming outside the window.

Mr. Hartwick: We'll get one before next week. I think through the transition that is certainly an issue.

Mr. Saylor: It had the word crisis in it so I figured it's got to be.

Mr. Hartwick: Until I get an explanation, I will not comment.

Ms. Sinner: The other items in the packet are the overtime reports and overtime requests from the prison. Did you wish to take a vote on #19?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco that we approve #19 in the personnel packet promoting Dan Eisenhauer to the position of MH/MR Administrator for Dauphin County; motion carried.

Mr. Haste: Next Tuesday we have interviews for Lieutenants at the Prison. So that will be coming in and we'll have candidates to fill those spots.

PURCHASE ORDERS

Mr. Baratucci: We have three items to cover today.

1. Purchase Orders
2. Bid Award for trash removal
3. RFP for copiers

I'll take the purchase orders first. You should have all received it yesterday. There is only one small budget issue on page 9 for Schaffner. We need to make a small budgetary adjustment to the shelter side. They have been contacted and will do that. The rest are there for your review and approval next week. If you have any questions today, I'll do my best to answer them.

Mr. Hartwick: I do have a few. I've been trying to resolve these before the meetings. There is one that is more specific that I would actually like to get some clarification on and I talked to Steve Howe today. Is Tom Guenther here today, as well?

Mr. Baratucci: Tom is here.

Mr. Hartwick: This relates to the amount of $51,350 for continuing support of maintenance for the MVP software with Manatron. I contacted Steve today and made sure that I found out all the surrounding information I wish we were at the point where we could discontinue any future payment to Manatron because they have failed to deliver a software project that is now 5-6 years in the making and from what I hear they reduced the amount that it takes for support and maintenance. I asked Steve specifically how many issues do you have to support maintenance on this software; and he said, that they still need between ten to twenty to maintain a relationship for the support of what they sold us even though it is not a complete package. The budgeted amount this year was for $85,000. This amount that is requested is for a reduced amount for support which is $51,000. Just sort of an update for the Board, how accurate is that and what do you think the new direction is related to trying to find alternative solutions and looking for other vendors that are able to provide software applications for us either outside or internally for us to continue any relationship we have with Manatron?

Mr. Guenther: The purchase order you have in front of you is for continued maintenance. In the tax administration area, you should be thinking about three different modules, basically billing for the tax billing preparation, tax collection for current year taxes, and the process of billing delinquent taxes. The piece that has been undelivered by Manatron is for the delinquent tax module. Billing and collections software has been delivered to us. In our opinion, we still have support issues. I would not say that it is a quality of a product as what we were expecting to get. That is why we still have continuing support issues with that. The maintenance that we have through them is to resolve that. The tax bills that were just prepared for this year and the current year collections in which we are doing, is running under the Manatron software that is provided. Delinquent tax collections are being done on the County mainframe system that we developed years ago. So we have an interaction between the two systems. I want to be perfectly clear here, that we can continue to support the operation and the business that needs to get done. It's in a patchwork environment. It's not where we want it or expected it to be a number of years ago when that contract was signed. The maintenance gives us support on billing and current year collection so we can continue to do those jobs as we investigate what those other options are. We are looking at other commercial available products that may be out there to do this work. Once it did not exist, seven or eight years ago when we entered into the original reassessment contract. We have identified a few other things that are available that were not available during that time period. In addition, we are also researching what it would take for us to develop those software modules in-house and do our own billing and collection software under current technology standards. That is the evaluation process that we are in as Carl Wass has begun to work with Manatron on what our remedy would be under the current situation.

Mr. Hartwick: I talked to Steve in our weekly meeting and asked him to get together with Carl and you to develop a letter talking about specifically what the County is asking for from Manatron as a baseline of which to begin to negotiate. From what I understand the contract was between $440,000-445,000 for the initial software. We still owe them $105,000 and clearly from what I understand now Manatron, and I promised Steve that I would say this, from a reassessment evaluation side did an extremely good job. From a software side they have completely failed. In Dauphin County and from what I hear they have abandoned the software for all of Pennsylvania relating to try to offer solutions for any Pennsylvania counties. From my standpoint, I would like to take any legal remedy that we can in order to try to recoup all and other resources they failed to deliver the software that they promised to this County.

Mr. Guenther: It is the software for tax administration. The software that they used for the appraisal and what we would call the camera which would be the computer system mass appraisal works fine. So the valuation of properties is secure, is fine, no issue or questions with it in regard to that. This is strictly in the tax administration for billing and collections. I agree with you and that is what we are looking at and working with Carl on.

Mr. Hartwick: When I saw the Manatron requisition pop up, I couldn't believe it.

Mr. Guenther: Until we come up with another option, we have to continue to bill and collect taxes. We're working with that.

Mr. Hartwick: I understand. This is the other point that I wanted to make today. I know this has been sort of an ongoing debate and I just wanted to state what my position was for the record for these Parks and Recreation trips. I received a letter earlier this week talking about having government being involved in competition with private industry and trying to subsidize a number of things and try to provide financing for certain places where other folks are in competition. They made a pretty strong argument for government subsidizes to try to stay out of being involved in something that is in competition with private industry. Although I think in urban areas it is a little more challenging to try to do development. You can certainly try to get involved to do some of the gap financing for redevelopment in these urban areas. But as I take a look at these projects, these Parks and Recreation trips, when I take a look at it from a budget standpoint, we make zero dollars for our general fund budget. As a matter of fact, sometimes it ends up costing us money. And we're doing things again that are in competition with other private industries and if we are spending a whole bunch of staff time doing this, I certainly don't understand the value besides to be in competition with other folks of what this provides as a value to taxes here in Dauphin County.

Mr. Haste: Actually, these are not in competition with private vendors; they're done in conjunction with private vendors. The only people that these would be competing with would be municipal projects that are done by municipal parks and recreation programs. A lot of municipalities offer these same trips. What Parks and Recreation has done this year is to try to work with some of those municipalities that they know offer those trips to make sure that we are not competing and offering the same trip. But it is not in competition with Apple Tours or anyone like that. It is in conjunction with them. I think it is Lowees the name of the company. It is a pass through to the people. We are not making a profit from it. It is a pass through service that is provided. That company will offer a discount to those folks that go on this because they think we have the ability to try to get a bus load together so that is why it is discounted but it is with a private vendor.

Mr. Hartwick: Then may be I should ask, the amount of staff time that we have putting together a trip, making a call to Lowees, spending time doing this when we talked about the significant fundraising challenge and the Parks and Recreation budget where we could be spending our time in better places. If I'm wrong with the competition piece I want to make sure ....

Mr. Haste: Again, the only one they would truly be competing with would be all the municipalities. Most of the municipalities do this and they are trying to coordinate this year so they are not competing with them. I know for a fact they went with Susquehanna Township. Susquehanna Township is doing Eagles Games, some shopping and things like that. They are making sure that they are not competing with them.

Mr. Baratucci: You are right; it is more of a service that they are offering because the money is just passing through from the clients who pay. As you can see what the prices are; it is just passing through. Lowees is actually somebody that they have used for a long time that organizes these things. I know there is a little bit of staff time involved, signing up people and things like that but I don't really think it should take away from the other project that you want them to do.

Mr. Haste: Even when I spoke to them; that is the exact answer that I got. It isn't that time intensive. The most that it is at the beginning of the year, actually the year prior, they get a list of potential trips from this company. They go through and discuss which ones they think that they could fill and which ones they couldn't fill.

Mr. Hartwick: I'm worried about the fundraising and whether or not...

Mr. Haste: They are working on that. Carl got the message. I don't know if Ed did. Carl understands it.

Mr. Hartwick: Carl has never been the problem.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Do you have any background information on page 16 for the Hazmat equipment?

Mr. Baratucci: Actually, I called because I was wondering who Donald Chesbro is because we usually make our purchases from other companies. D'Juana told me that this was somebody that they were buying these from for the hazmat vehicle. It is something specific from this guy who owns this company and the only information that I have was that it was for the hazmat vehicle that they are upgrading. Remember there was a truck cap that came through last week or before. I guess they are making some enhancements to that vehicle. These are some radios, sirens, antennas that are going in that vehicle. I don't have any details other than that. If you like I could have whoever at EMA that is working on this contact you prior to the meeting. I thought that they would have.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I actually sent an email out as we are sitting here and hoping to get a response back so I wouldn't have to ask this question but.

Mr. Baratucci: I'll follow up on it to make sure that they get an answer.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Am I to assume though that this vendor would be a state contractor?

Mr. Baratucci: This would fall under the amount of having to do any of that. They said this vendor specifically had the product that they were looking for. They are not the same type of radios that we would normally buy or same type of units that are going with the project. They said it is completely separate from the radio project, etc. I don't know a lot about this vendor because the ones that we usually use are Motorola, Capital City Communications, and K&C Communications. They have been the three vendors that have provided most of the communication equipment out there over the years. So I don't know a whole lot about this one; but again I can make sure that they follow-up. I did ask the question and that was the answer that I got.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Obviously, the question is two-fold now. Why are we replacing equipment on the vehicle or is this a new vehicle which I didn't think it was? But now I have a question as to what is the process that they go through because obviously our process is such that we are going to make sure that we are going to get the best price on the market. I'll make sure that I'll look into it.

Mr. Baratucci: I'll have them follow-up. Are there any other?

Mr. Hartwick: That is it.

Mr. Baratucci: The other items that I handed you, the first one is another BlackBerry request. It is another personal request for the Assistant Director of Victim Witness. Since you didn't seem to have any issues with the personal requests, if you would like to approve that today, I can forward it onto Information Technology and let them know to get this person hooked up.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Do I have a motion to approve this personal request for a BlackBerry?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve a personal request for a BlackBerry for the Assistant Director of Victim Witness.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I seconded it based on the fact that this is a personal pay. We have a motion and a second; motion carried. (Commissioner Haste was not present for the motion.)

Mr. Baratucci: The second item, we opened bids on Friday for a new contract for our trash removal and disposal. I have a spokesperson here. We had a new player come into the picture, Penn Waste, Inc. They were the low bidder. We've done these three year contacts a couple of times and I believe the last two or three York Waste was our current supplier and low bidder. Penn Waste I understand was just recently awarded a contract for Susquehanna Township for their residential and business pickups. They did give the lowest bid. The spreadsheet shows you the different facilities. They have a price that's holding for all three years. Their low bid was $312,564.96. Our contract runs March 1 through February 28 of each year. So what I would like to do is if you are okay with this is make an award conditioned upon getting the contracts signed, the performance bond and insurance certificates that are necessary. I will get all that to the Solicitor's Office for signatures next week. That would give us a week for transition because we will need York Waste to come and pick up their containers and have Penn Waste contact everybody to put theirs out. Again it is a fairly cut and dry item. If you are okay with that, that would be my recommendation. The representatives from Penn Waste are here in case you have any questions.

Mr. Hartwick: I'm okay with that, just delivery and being more aggressive in the market, can we hear just a little bit about your company since you are here.

Ms. Turner: My name is Carol Turner and I'm Vice President of Sales with Penn Waste. We started our company in March of 2000 and had been very successful in growing our company primarily in the York County market. We've had several opportunities to bid in Dauphin County and were recently successful in being awarded the Susquehanna Township contract. That put us in this market and since we are here we were very interested in bidding this year on the Dauphin County trash removal proposal. We operate six front load trucks, five roll up trucks, 40 residential pick up trucks and 20 recycling trucks. So we've grown to be a good sized player in the market. We can give you references. Our customers are extremely happy with the services we provide and our prices are extremely competitive.

Mr. Haste: Is there any change in the pick up at all? I happen to be a resident in Susquehanna and I know it caught me by surprise. I probably should have been reading a little bit more from the township. Our price went up and our amount that we put out changed which caught us off guard. Do we have any changes in pick up in this..

Ms. Turner: I'll be contacting each facility manager and confirming pick up dates. This is a lot different than the residential contract.

Mr. Baratucci: Actually, each of our facilities was contacted to make sure that their pick ups and needs were the same and none of them changed. This is a little bit more money than we are paying now but of course it is a new three year agreement.

Commissioners: Thank you.

(The vote was taken later in the meeting under Public Participation.)

Mr. Baratucci: The last item I have, about a week ago, I sent all of you the results from the copier Request for Proposals that we prepared. We received ten (10) different proposals. The lowest one was from our current supplier Block Business Systems. I thought they gave us an excellent proposal. I think I communicated that to you in the email. Basically at this point, you can either act on this today or you can take it under consideration for another week and do it next week. The first round of leases we currently have end around April 1. Again there is going to be some time needed to contact each of the departments and discuss any upgrades and the new type of machine that we are going to get for them. We need some time to do that. It will take a while. So the earlier that we can do this, we have approximately twenty of the eighty machines that are up with the first batch of leases. The one nice perk with staying with the same company is if we have ones in round two or three that maybe are ready to be upgraded but normally couldn't because we have a current lease this vendor will work with us to upgrade those earlier and not make us wait until round two or three if we have some people that fall in round two or three and just over time maybe their needs have changed. So that is one thing that we could do. We want to review all 80 of the machines and definitely replace the ones where the leases are coming up but maybe some others if need be. If you have any questions on this project, I would be happy to answer them.

Mr. Hartwick: I'll talk to you about it later.

Mr. Baratucci: Okay. Do you want to wait to approve it until next week?

Mr. Haste: Yes.

Mr. Baratucci: That is all I have.

TRAINING PACKET

Mr. Haste: Is there anything that we need to approve in the training packet today?

Mr. Saylor: We need to take action on Item #19, a request from Emergency Management. I believe that is the only one.

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve Item #19?

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve Item #19 in the Training Packet; motion carried.

COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION & ACTIONS

Mr. Haste: Are there any items that need to be brought up at this time?

Mr. Hartwick: No.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Yes, just to say to Chad I don't know where we are in the appraisal process but if somebody could follow-up and find out where we are because expectations were that by mid-February, end of February we would know what is going on. I want to make sure that we are still on track to find out what is going on with the appraisal with Spring Creek.

Mr. Saylor: It is my understanding that we should have some preliminary information soon, probably by first thing next week.

Mr. Haste: I hope you got a draft letter from Secretary Beihler from PennDOT that was sent to me and I forwarded to you folks. He is asking if we concur with that. If you could give me your thumbs up or thumbs down so I could let him know. He is on the fast track.

Also, note we have Prison Board Meeting this afternoon. I know the Judge and someone else will not be there.

SOLICITOR'S REPORT

Mr. Foreman: I have nothing to add to the Solicitor's Report but would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Mr. Hartwick: If I could #11, the AutoZone Lease, we are expecting Turkey Hill and AutoZone to begin to break ground as soon as it is nice out.

Mr. Foreman: I think they have some local zoning or land development things they have to do. But they will be breaking ground and then the lease payments will begin as soon as they have construction.

Mr. Hartwick: I would like a copy of #19. Is this just a routine thing for #22? It sounds like an opportunity to expand services or maybe it is something that we've always done. I just wanted to know.

Mr. Foreman: Item #22 is a proposal that came from the Coroner's Association. It is basically a cooperation agreement where if there is an emergency of any kind in one county that doesn't affect all counties, that neighboring counties that enter into the agreement will provide services. So if there is a mass disaster say in a neighboring county, our coroner could help in that county if we also weren't affected.

Mr. Hartwick: Would it be ones, you can see many of the rural counties may not have an opportunity to have somebody out at the scene. Are we going to be covering for them now and any reimbursement of expenses or is this just the matter of if there is an issue we'll send somebody if there is no one else available?

Mr. Foreman: Under the cooperation agreement, if there was a request from a neighboring county that entered into this agreement, when the request is made we would determine if we had the ability to help. If we do, we would send help. If we don't, we wouldn't. There is no reimbursement allowed in the agreement. It suggests that consumable supplies could be reimbursed. No reimbursement for personnel cost.

Mr. Haste: According to our coroner it was for things like the Somerset issue, post 9/11, where they had as you know the plane went down out there and they needed experts to come in. I think what they are trying to do, as we all know coroners are elected and there is really, I don't think there are any qualifications other than getting elected. So there are some coroners that have more forensic abilities than others and I think the idea is as a Commonwealth to try to share that knowledge when there is a disaster larger than that community.

Mr. Hartwick: Knowing that, I think that is absolutely great. I think we should be sharing the services. My only concern was if you enter into these agreements with some of the other counties, are you going to be called out to be an expert all the time in Perry County?

Mr. Foreman: It is not for the normal process. It is for when there is a disaster, manmade, natural or any other kind. This is just for disasters.

Mr. Haste: It is really so the coroner can make the decision on the fly and does not need to then wait and come in here and get permission from the Board to go out. He or she gets to make the decision to go out. It's mutual aide where if there is a disaster in Lancaster County, it's the same thing. It is my understanding for time and effort and expertise, we can't turn around and bill Lancaster for the coroner's time and vice versa; consumable, medical supplies and things like that, we could.

Mr. Hartwick: And in a case of a disaster, I think it is perfectly okay. I just wanted to make sure that isn't a new aide agreement that everybody runs around trying to be the expert on all of these different trials.

REPORT FROM CHIEF CLERK/CHIEF OF STAFF - CHAD SAYLOR

Mr. Saylor: I have one item that I would like to bring to your attention. I may have spoken about this in a previous report. It is the issue of the Department of Revenue's intent to collect sales tax for copies and services that the County provides and collects a fee for. We've been notified that CCAP, the County Commissioners Association, has been in negotiation with the Department of Revenue to come up with a workable plan to implement this. They have reached that plan and that the Department of Revenue is going to be providing some training courses. They are going to put out some guide lines as to what specifically they want the sales tax collected on. They have asked us to designate a representative from the County to attend these meetings that they are going to be having around the state. I believe Barbara Carney in the Treasurer's Office is going to play a key role in this and has agreed to do that. I have discussed this in at least two directors' meetings so the directors have a heads up and notices coming. I do know that some of the elected officials in their own associations have been discussing this issue. The Audit Committee is going to be meeting soon and we will take it up there as well. I think the Department of Revenue is anticipating that we will begin to collect this in January of next year. We've got some time to try to make the best out of this that we can. Hopefully the cost to us will be minimal but we don't know at this point. So you are aware, that is where we stand with sales tax. Other than that if you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them. That is all that I wanted to report on.

Mr. Hartwick: The amount of sales tax that we pay from copies will be a direct reduction in property tax relief, no!

Mr. Saylor: Absolutely!

Mr. Haste: Are there any other comments from the Board? (There were none.)

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

We are again at the point in time for public participation, is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Board? (There was none.)

Mr. Baratucci: We need to take a vote on the trash bid. I wanted you to vote on that so we could move forward to get the contracts, performance bonds, and everything ready for next week.

Mr. Haste: Okay, I didn't realize you needed that this week.

Mr. Baratucci: I think that was when you were coming back into the meeting. If you could do that, it would be great.

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the bid for Penn Waste?

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve the bid award to Penn Waste for the County's trash removal; motion carried.

Mr. Haste: Is there anything else? (There was none.)

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to adjourn the meeting; motion carried.